header-logo header-logo

Read the small print

26 April 2013 / Nicholas Asprey
Issue: 7557 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail
istock_000005657917large1

A covenant to keep a property in good & substantial repair & condition can hold hidden pitfalls, as Nicholas Asprey reports

Leases sometimes contain a covenant to keep the property “in good and substantial repair and condition”. In effect, this is two covenants; namely, a covenant to keep the property in good and substantial repair and a covenant to keep the property in good and substantial condition. This article examines how the covenant to keep in good condition has potential to go beyond the liability to keep in good repair. This is not a new topic but there are unresolved issues and the potential for the second covenant to go beyond repair is not always understood.

It must be emphasised that each case turns on the particular covenant construed in its own context and surrounding circumstances, as was emphasised by Robert Walker LJ in Welsh v Greenwich LBC [2000] 3 EGLR 41. The factors to be taken into account were described by Nicholls LJ in Holding & Management Ltd v Property Holding & Investment

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll